I don't know if it's literally someone slamming a door in your face, but it's what opportunities are provided. So building on one of the things about pay equity, if a certain amount of dollars is available for types of jobs, if those jobs are just the entry level and they're not getting the apprenticeship agreement, then they could be entry level labourers year after year. There's no question, just by their nature, apprenticeships are male-dominated environments. In many cases, it's about what opportunities are already there. So you're hearing about things because your uncle has worked there or maybe your dad. That's how things are; that's the network connection that apprenticeships were originally based on.
To get past that, sometimes, when we're talking about having women in non-traditional occupations, we're not looking for women to get into these fields to be one of the guys. We're looking for women to be working in these fields as women. We're now looking at how to increase the participation. If there wasn't a plan in place on how to deal with it or how that looks, there is an intimidation factor somewhere, and I'm not sure what we need to do. I guess that's the work you're doing, providing a road map on how things have to change to increase the participation.
I guess one of the questions I've been having with the committee, because I'm not aware of the work, is how much information you already have about retention for women in non-traditional roles to date. What are building on, based on recommendations from retention strategies thus far?
I didn't realize that specific work was being done with aboriginal women as part of this panel, but it would be interesting to see more work with the NAOs about what we can contribute to the work we've already been doing for over 10 years in the employment and training sector.